LITT
Try LITT free
HUA TIAN ENGINEERING PTE. LTD. v WAN SERN METAL INDUSTRIES PTE LTD
at [65] that “current assets” and “current liabilities” refer to “assets which will be realisable and debts which fall due within 12-month timeframe.” Notwithstanding, the court also held at [67] that the timeframe for assessing the current assets and liabilities of a company “should not be set
The "Duden"
the rust of the bottom of the Vessel’s holds. As such, the respondents held the appellants, being the contractual carrier of the Cargo, responsible for the loss and damage they suffered. Proceedings in Singapore 5 On 7 July 2005, the respondents filed a writ of summons (“the Writ”) in the High Court
GOH KAR TUCK (WU JIADA) & Anor v SAMUEL KOH
the trial judge’s decision granting specific performance, ie, that the appellant should sell and transfer the property to the respondents. In Tai Joon Lan, the deposit was to be paid to the vendor’s solicitors which had not yet been named in the option. The Court of Appeal nevertheless held that
The "Patraikos 2"
leen Boey (Joseph Tan Jude Benny) for the plaintiffs; Haridass Ajaib, Augustine Liew and Kueh Ping Yang (Haridass Ho & Partners) for the defendants Parties : — Admiralty and Shipping – Carriage of goods by sea – Carriage of goods by sea – Manning requirement – Defendants' obligation to exercise due
CHEN XIAOQI & Anor v CHEN FANGQI & Anor
SUMMARY OF THE ORDERS MADE IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANTS.................38 THE DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIM .................................................38 WHETHER THE ALLEGED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES BY THE LETTER SHOULD BE ENFORCED ..............................................................
ZHONG KAI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PTE. LTD. v DIAMOND GLASS ENTERPRISE PTE. LTD.
d … Defendant And Between Diamond Glass Enterprise Pte Ltd … Plaintiff in counterclaim And Zhong Kai Construction Co Pte Ltd … Defendant in counterclaim JUDGMENT Version No 1: 02 Dec 2021 (09:45 hrs) [Building and Construction Law] — [Damages] — [Liquidated damages] [Building and Construction Law
XIA ZHENG v SONG JIANBO & Anor
on a joint tenancy, and so she had become its sole owner by survivorship. Mr Tan’s new wife, Ms Tao, disagreed – she contended that the interim judgment had effected severance of the joint tenancy and Mr Tan had thereby become its sole owner. Ms Tao argued that accordingly the investment propert
SIEMENS INDUSTRY SOFTWARE INC. v INZIGN PTE LTD
question which this suit raises is whether the Defendant may be held liable (either directly or vicariously) for Mr Win’s actions and, if so, what the appropriate quantum of damages should be. Facts The parties 3 The Plaintiff is an American company which is part of the Siemens corporate group.
HECTOR FINANCE GROUP LIMITED & Anor v CHAN CHEW KEAK
himself out externally as the Chairman of the first plaintiff and of the Group.23 He adopted this title even though the first plaintiff had never conferred it upon him and even when he was not a director of the first plaintiff. 22 From 2005 until 2019, the defendant instructed and ordered Mr Sion
6DM (S) PTE. LTD. v AE BRANDS KOREA LTD & 3 Ors
2) Asahi Beer Asia Ltd (3) Asahi Premium Brands Ltd (4) Federico Bogna … Defendants Originating Summons No 138 of 2021 Between 6DM (S) Pte. Ltd. … Plaintiff And (1) AE Brands Korea Ltd (2) Asahi Beer Asia Ltd (3) Asahi Premium Brands Ltd (4) Asahi Brands Germany GmBH (formerly known as Asahi Brand
CYX v CYY
g (Leong Partnership) for the appellant (husband); Ms Lucy Netto (Netto Tan & S Magin) for the respondent (wife) Parties : CYX — CYY Family Law – Divorce – Ancillary orders – Division of matrimonial assets – Apportionment of proceeds of sale of matrimonial flat – Custody, care and control of
ANG BOON TIAN v JERVOIS PRIVATE LIMITED & Anor
[Civil Procedure — Summary judgment] [Contract — Contractual terms — Express terms — Meaning of “in any event”] Version No 1: 13 May 2022 (11:09 hrs) i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ...........
CJY v CJZ & 4 Ors
(“Summons 4854”), and I upheld the Registrar’s decision on appeal. The plaintiff has appealed against my decision, and these are my full grounds of decision. Version No 1: 26 Mar 2021 (17:33 hrs) CJY v CJZ [2021] SGHC 69 2 3 To preserve the confidentiality of the arbitration, parties’ names and i
FOO KOK BOON v NGOW KHEONG SHEN & 2 Ors
for a unanimous court in Adri at [27], a judgment pronouncing on a legal issue is traditionally taken to be unbounded by time. Such a judgment would therefore have both retroactive and prospective effect. The practical effect of the retroactive effect of judgments is that a judgment would attach
RIO CHRISTOFLE v MALCOLM TAN CHUN CHUEN
— [Breach] Version No 1: 22 Mar 2023 (15:50 hrs) i CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1 THE BACKGROUND.....................................................................................2 THE PLAINTIFF’S CASE..........
THE LAW SOCIETY OF SINGAPORE v SEOW THENG BENG SAMUEL
in abeyance, pending the completion of the Newton hearing. In Seow Theng Beng Samuel v Law Society of Singapore [2021] SGHC Version No 1: 18 May 2022 (15:53 hrs) Law Society of Singapore v Seow Theng Beng Samuel [2022] SGHC 112 5 258, we dismissed the respondent’s application, holding that he had
The "Sunrise Crane"
12 In the event they are held liable in damages, the Defendants say they are entitled to limit their liability. They have pleaded as a defence limitation of liability under s136 of the Merchant Shipping Act (Cap.179). According to the Defendants’ calculations, tonnage limitation is $380,267.52 The L
Pharma Inc. (Wordwide) Pte. Ltd. v Limb Salvage And Revision Arthroplasty Surgery Pte Ltd
on 27 March 2017 and 6 July 2027 attended by Mr Ho and Mr Nathan, arguing that these constitute evidence of the alleged variation. 15 I note that the learned DJ made no specific findings of fact as to the applicant’s case on the variation of the Agreement. Nonetheless, based on the applicant’s o
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Mahadi Bin Muhamad Mukhtar
by the Court of Appeal in See Li Quan Mendel v Public Prosecutor [2020] 2 SLR 630. 19 Mendel See is instructive in two respects. First, as Thean J notes, even as violence is an element of the offence of robbery, the use of a dangerous weapon to threaten violence ought to be an aggravating factor
Pacific Orient Sea Transport Pte Ltd v The Owners of the Ship or Vessel 'Ever Wealthy'
Judith Prakash J Counsel Name(s) : Oon Thian Seng with Collin Choo (Joseph Tan Jude Benny) for the plaintiffs; Belinda Ang, SC with Anna Quah (Ang & Partners) for the defendants Parties : Pacific Orient Sea Transport Pte Ltd — The Owners of the Ship or Vessel 'Ever Wealthy' JUDGMENT: Background 1. T
The "Sin Chuen No 112" (Union Bank of Taiwan and others, interveners)
used. In Cropper v Smith (1884) 26 Ch 700 (“Cropper”), Bowen LJ held (at 710): Now, I think it is a well established principle that the object of Courts is to decide the rights of the parties, and not to punish them for mistakes they make in the conduct of their cases by deciding otherwise than in a
Tng Eng Chye alias Tng Eng Chye, Robert v Chia Kim Chua and Another
3.2 The Registrar then held a Pre-Trial Conference (‘PTC’) on 22nd November 1999 and fixed new dates for the trial i.e. 22nd and 23rd December 1999. 4. Defendants’ Counsel informed me that he was appointed and instructed as Counsel on 4th December 1999. He stated he had also received the legal paper
CHERYL TAN YI LIN v TAN YEW FAI
on my/our behalf until payment of your professional costs and disbursements. I/We agree that any bills remaining unpaid after thirty (30) days of the date of issue thereof will bear interest at the rate of 5.33% per annum. 1 Applicant’s Bundle of Documents (“ABOD”) at Tab 1 p 5. Version No
PANIRCELVAN S/O KALIANNAN & 9 Ors v EE HOONG LIANG
PRINCIPLES ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT ............................................12 FRAUD ISSUE ...............................................................................................12 PLEADING OF FRAUD.....................................................................................13 WHETHER